JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Concept Selection of NPP Construction Delay Risk Assessment Methodology Using Systems Engineering Approach
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Concept Selection of NPP Construction Delay Risk Assessment Methodology Using Systems Engineering Approach
Hossen, Muhammed Mufazzal; Kang, Sunkoo; Jung, JC; Kim, Jonghyun;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Construction industry faces a lot of inherent uncertainties and issues and the construction phase of nuclear power project is not free from this risk. This paper investigates promising methodologies to be used on nuclear power plant (NPP) construction schedule delay risk assessment by using entry level systems engineering approach. This study contains how the initial concept for the risk assessment methodology has been developed. In this point of view, this work structured on three main phases: needs analysis (NA), concept exploration (CE), and concept definition (CD) through systems engineering (SE) approach. Traditionally, the SE process is applied to technical development programs but this study opens up a new avenue that SE can also be successfully applied to the development and optimization of the risk assessment model. This study provides a rational and systematic process for developing and selecting the best risk assessment model. This paper selects analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method to assess NPP construction schedule delay risk for international project. As conclusion, the proposed concept and selected method can discriminate successfully and clearly among schedule delay risk assessment methods.
 Keywords
Need analysis;Concept exploration;Concept definition;Systems engineering;Schedule Delay Risk;NPP;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
S.A. Assaf, and S. Al- Hejji, Causes of delay in large construction projects, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 24, pp. 349-357, 2006. crossref(new window)

2.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Nuclear Energy Series No. NP-T-2.7, Project Management in Nuclear Power Plant Construction: Guidelines and Experience, VIENNA, 2012.

3.
Grant Harris, Phil Heptonstall, Robert Gross and David Handley, Cost estimates for nuclear power in the UK, Energy Policy, Vol. 62, pp. 431-442, 2013. crossref(new window)

4.
Alexander Kossiakoff, Systems Engineering Principles and practice, 2nd Edition, John Willey & Sons Publishers, pp. 57-159, 2011.

5.
INCOSE Systems Engineering Handbook. v3.2.2. INCOSE‐TP‐2003‐002‐03.2.2, October 2011.

6.
William Robinson, Gisele Welch, and Gary O'Neill, The Need for a Systems Engineering Approach For Measuring and Predicting the Degradation of Aging Systems And How It Can Be Achieved, Georgia Tech Research Institute, Logistic and Maintenance Applied Research Center, Altlanta, Georgia, 2003.

7.
ISO GUIDE 73, Risk management-Vocabulary, 2009.

8.
Project Management Institute (PMI), A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE ($PMBOK^{(R)}$ Guide), Fifth Edition, 2013.

9.
Cooper, D., Grey, S., Raymond, G., and Walker, P., Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk in Large Projects and Complex Procurements, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2005.

10.
Rasool Mehdizadeh, Dynamic and multi-perspective risk management of construction projects using tailor-made Risk Breakdown Structures, UNIVERSITE DE BORDEAUX, Doctoral Thesis, 2012.

11.
Amir Reza Karimi Azari, Neda Mousavi, S. Farid Mousavi and Seyedi Bagher Hosseini, Risk assessment model selection in construction industry, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 38, pp. 9105-9111, 2011. crossref(new window)

12.
Muhammed Mufazzal Hossen, Ohaga Eric Owino, and JC Jung, Selection of Architect Engineering Concept for Barge Mounted SMR Using Systems Engineering Approach, Journal of the Korea Society of Systems Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 17-32, June 2014. crossref(new window)

13.
Saaty, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process Panning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, USA: McGraw-Hill, 1980.

14.
Saaty, T. L., Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process, Int. J. Services Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 83-98, 2008. crossref(new window)

15.
Mohammad A. Mustafa and Jamal F. Al-Bahar, Project Risk Assessment Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process, IEEE TRANSACTION ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, Vol. 38, No.1, pp. 46-52, 1991. crossref(new window)

16.
McCabe B., AbouRizk SM., and Goebel R., Belief networks for construction performance diagnostics, J Comput Civil Eng ASCE, Vol. 12(2), pp. 93-100, 1998. crossref(new window)

17.
Van Truong Luu, Soo-Yong Kim, Nguyen Van Tuan, and Stephen O. Ogunlana, Quantifying schedule risk in construction projects using Bayesian belief networks, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 27, pp. 39-50, 2009. crossref(new window)

18.
Syahrizal, Acceleration Time Analysis of Project Work on Optimum Structure with Additional Cost, Journal of Civil Engineering Research, Vol. 4(3A), pp. 208-213, 2014.

19.
Thomas A. Carbone and Donald D. Tippett, Project Risk Management Using the Project Risk FMEA, Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2004.

20.
Guidance on Failure Modes & Effects Analyses (FMEAs), The International Marine Contractors Association, April 2002.

21.
Jay Tarakkumar Shah, Probabilistic risk assessment method for prioritization of risk factors, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, The Department of Industrial Engineering, Thesis of Master of Science in Industrial Engineering, 2004.

22.
NASA/SP-2011-3421, Probabilistic Risk Assessment Procedures Guide for NASA Managers and Practitioners, Second Edition, NASA Headquarters Washington, DC, 2011.

23.
N. Ravi Shankar, and V. Sireesha, An Approximation for the Activity Duration Distribution, Supporting Original PERT Applied Mathematical Sciences, Vol. 3, No. 57, pp. 2823 - 2834, 2009.

24.
Chidambaram Ramanathan, SP Narayanan and Arazi B Idrus " Construction delays causing risks on time and cost- a critical review", Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, Vol. 12, Issue 1, pp. 37-57, 2012. crossref(new window)

25.
Ahmad Reza Ommani, Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis for farming system businesses management: Case of wheat farmers of Shadervan District, Shoushtar Township, Iran, African Journal of Business Management, Vol. 5(22), pp. 9448-9454, 2011.